squared always best for autox?
 

I've read many people opine square setup is best for autox. Is that pure gospel? I have 275 up front, next size up in my tire that fits is 315. Don't want to do the work to make that fit up front, but think it'll fit in back fine. Assuming I have enough suspension adjustment (and driving ability) to manage under/oversteer, wouldn't I be better off with 315/275 than 275 square?

square set up are more for the experience drivers. most rwd car comes with stagger because the average driver are more prone to oversteer than understeer. for best it goes 275/275-275/285-285/285 and so on and so on.

right now 275/315 will be better than 275/275.

I read it was better for tracking so i went 285 all around. But i have a very light rub so for my track set up (dedicated track wheels and tires) i plan to go 275 all around

where are you rubbing at? With 285, you shouldn't have any rub unless your either over lowered or your wheel offset is off.

Car is lowered too much. But the cheap top speed coils are maxed out in height. The car came with them, I plan to get some Fortune Autos next year and raise it up a bit. It has a slight rub on the inside arm but mostly the fender. It's only under load

I'm running a 18x10.5 +22

I get as much good rubber on the ground as the rules for the class will allow. Then set up the suspension around that. Since tire width limits apply to all 4 corners the same, that means the same tire at every corner....square. (ability to rotate between events help the tires last a little longer too)

I ran different width wheels, but the same tires. It was more for packaging and keeping the front slightly narrower than anything else....
https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/my350z....89d9622c57.jpg

My car is only for fun track days so I don't need to follow any rules.


but if ^^^^ runs the same size tires i feel I made a good choice. Just have ti figure out the rubbing. Hopefully FA will allow me to get the car a little higher

Which fortune auto coils were you going to get?

I'm debating the 510s but not sure if it's worth it for a weekend car only thay would maybe see the track 6 times a year. If i get 500s or 510s both will come with radial bearings and swift springs. Just can't pick which ones. I have 5 I'll next year anyway.

Do you have any input? Sorry op for thread stealing

I would sway away from the 500's they really are a base coilover. Plus the upper mount is rubber which did some really wonky stuff on the shock dyno. Even from thier own engineer, he stated the 500's were more of an oem+ replacement. The shock dyno is courtesy of novak racing.

https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/my350z....38f0d9a4b3.jpg

That being said... for the price and compareable coilovers, these are pretty good quality so don't dismiss them if that what your budget limits you to.

Pm'ing

From what I see most prefer the square setup's over staggered (especially for autocross). However for those that have ran both and complain about understeer not a single person seems to mention their suspension settings and attempting to tune it out.....on the staggered setup did anyone try to balance the car with less rear camber, toe out, and front caster? I have owned 4 different evo's (tend to understeer) and for tracking them in autocross or Japanese gymkhana I generally run as much positive caster as I can stand (5-6 degrees), and change camber and toe settings to get the car to do what I want....so for those that have ran both have you attempted to balance the car out on the staggered setup? You would think on small staggered setups (10-20mm wider rear tires) you should be able to get it to balance out for a neutral handling car and better straight line traction or is it too much? opinions?

My staggered setup was balanced very well, but the square setup has more rubber on the ground.

I guess that all depends on how wide you are going for instance you won't get a 305 under the front fenders under normal circumstances... What was ur staggered setup? Suspension settings? Camber, toe, caster?

With my 275F/295R staggered setup I tried dialing out the understeer with every bit of adjustability I had available (camber, toe, ride height, compression, rebound, sway bar etc.) I could get the car to be more oversteer prone but it ended up being a slower car. Rear traction in a straight line was never the limiting factor even with a V8. I'll be switch to a square setup soon so i'll let you know how it works out.

STU limits tread width to 285. 285's fit at every corner.

Staggered setup was 255/275.

no caster? IMO caster adjustments provide the most significant changes to a street driven auto-x car. Ok thanks for the input. Please let me know how it works out.

There is no factory way of adjusting caster. Its primarily why you don't see a lot of talk about it. There are only 2 after market upper control arms that even have provisions for it and go figure, they are restricted from use in most SCCA classes that the Z is competitive in. I'm not disagreeing by any means that you might be able to dial it out a bit more with caster, but with all the weight in the nose of our cars, you need a square setup to truly get rid of it.

Most oem suspension in cars do not have adjustable caster like the Z. The Evo is the same way and does tend to under steer badly under high AOA. I was surprised that no one takes the time to do it that's all. It was easily one of the best changes I made to my suspension. It allows the car to have a balanced nature at low speeds and much tighter at high speeds. Most SCCA classes restrict this? I am assuming Street, STU ? Not SM2, and prepared classes?